OBJECTIVE: To prospectively record the clinical consequences of R1 resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma compared to patients with locally advanced tumours not undergoing surgery. BACKGROUND: Surgery is the only potentially curative treatment of pancreatic cancer, and postoperative safety is increasing. The rate of R1 resections might also increase unintentionally as surgical procedures with curative goal become more comprehensive, and the clinical outcome requires further prospective evaluation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective observational cohort study from October 2008 to December 2010. Outcome after R1 resection (group 1, surgery, n = 32) and conservative palliative chemoradiation/endoscopy (group 2, no surgery, n = 56) is compared with survival and longitudinal patient-reported quality of life (QoL) as endpoints. QoL was assessed by the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS). RESULTS: Demographic characteristics and tumour diameters were similar in both groups: 38.0 (31.3, 49.8) mm in group 1 versus 44.0 (39.6, 49.1) mm in group 2 (p = 0.18). Perioperative morbidity was 25% with no mortality. Disease-specific survival was 18.0 (14.5, 23.8) months in group 1 versus 8.1 (4.8, 10.1) months in group 2 (p < 0.0001). Overall survival was 11 (7.8, 14.4) months. Reduction in fatigue was significantly improved in the surgery group 6, 12, and 19 weeks after baseline, whereas reduction in global health was significantly better in group 2. CONCLUSION: Radical removal (R0 resection) is the primary aim of surgery, but also R1 resection seems to improve survival and QoL, compared to outcome in patients with locally advanced tumours not undergoing surgery.
OBJECTIVE: To prospectively record the clinical consequences of R1 resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma compared to patients with locally advanced tumours not undergoing surgery. BACKGROUND: Surgery is the only potentially curative treatment of pancreatic cancer, and postoperative safety is increasing. The rate of R1 resections might also increase unintentionally as surgical procedures with curative goal become more comprehensive, and the clinical outcome requires further prospective evaluation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective observational cohort study from October 2008 to December 2010. Outcome after R1 resection (group 1, surgery, n = 32) and conservative palliative chemoradiation/endoscopy (group 2, no surgery, n = 56) is compared with survival and longitudinal patient-reported quality of life (QoL) as endpoints. QoL was assessed by the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS). RESULTS: Demographic characteristics and tumour diameters were similar in both groups: 38.0 (31.3, 49.8) mm in group 1 versus 44.0 (39.6, 49.1) mm in group 2 (p = 0.18). Perioperative morbidity was 25% with no mortality. Disease-specific survival was 18.0 (14.5, 23.8) months in group 1 versus 8.1 (4.8, 10.1) months in group 2 (p < 0.0001). Overall survival was 11 (7.8, 14.4) months. Reduction in fatigue was significantly improved in the surgery group 6, 12, and 19 weeks after baseline, whereas reduction in global health was significantly better in group 2. CONCLUSION: Radical removal (R0 resection) is the primary aim of surgery, but also R1 resection seems to improve survival and QoL, compared to outcome in patients with locally advanced tumours not undergoing surgery.